New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-01-01

ARGUMENTS HEARD BY JUSTICE PRATT

ARGUMENTS HEARD BY JUSTICE PRATT.
GENERAL TRACY AND Mr. NICOLL sPEAK-THE DE-
CIsION WILL NOT BE LONG DELAYED.
After repeated adournments account Of his health
Judge Pratt Of the Supreme Court in yesterday
heard the arguments on the application for stay OF pro-
ceedngs In the case Of exAdcrman Mctluade General
Tracy r. 8. Neweombe and Thomas F. Grady appeared
for McQuadc and ictAttorneys Ncoll and sempie
for the prosecution. Owing to his health Judge Pratt
suggested that the argument be limited to one
hour for each side. General Tracy made the
argument for the stay. McQuade, ne sal''
had always consistent advocate OF surface road
In Broadway before and after his election as Alderman
and up to the time the franchise was granted he had
borne uncxceptonable character Now he was convey
cd OF bribery in voting lsudable measure OF which
he honestly approved The evidence against him came
from two corrupt Aldermen. who claimed that com
bine" had been formed vote together on all railroad
measures ind that McQuade was one OF those In H. Al
ter reviewing tho evidence Of Fugra and Duffy IN TINS
matter General Tracy said that the case against NC
Quade solely upon their evidence and one OF them
said that he received FOR his vote and the other
$40 600 discrepancy not being explained The nrst
exception which the defence rested upon was the acton
OF the Recorder in setting arbitrarily aside SIX jurors
three Of them the ground Of lack Of intelligence The
law said the Commissioner Of Jurors was to Judge OF TINS
and the After recng the case OF A. e. Angus
who was aside arbitrarily. General Tracy said:
This blow It the rect O. trial sy j1ry and "at .s pS
mo ras 400 years immenoral has been that
The s 1 s sa nS aa .es them
second exception was upon the ground OF peremptory
challenge The statutes provided that the people snond
and the defence challenged the right OF the
people to challenge eeased But III inns case AMI n'e ar s
challenged until finally they got rid Of the last two men
who were in the urSox when was an st f e,cep ss
Co. when iis close the trial wa: suspended
paper to the Recorder and two strangers were al
lowed within the bar of the court to swear to The paper
to make matters worse sti the jury were taken through
the streets past bulletins rejecting upon the CD qctcr OF
flight Of other Aldermen Canada also not adnissi
bic The csmSny OF pr a Was hs o
these that they had run away from fear had ebear-
must not considered. and such error alone was suf
% for SS0 as Of that IRsy h ha sw SS
falsely before the Senate Committee; in order
matter The Jury therefore at liberty TO disregard
their evidence The Recorders charge did not cover this
point General Tracy aG amss " c es%H o o H re
that ii the girls story Was Improbable theJ might dis-
r Ncoll argued that the conviction of MeQuade for
bribery just and his rights were not prjced In the
trial The had substantially CHARGED all the propo-
OF the defence The evidence OF three ex Aldermen
and vast array OF corio ,, , % nm 'e
The Court discretion i'll the formation OF jury,
had appeared in the juryoox with smik and a leer
which showed that he was not proper person 10 slt III
ta Jury and the defence took no exception 10 the jury
as selected its mpartiaity conceded In regard TO
the matter of percmptory challenges, Mr. Nlcou held
that when the complexion of jury was changed ana II
became substantially new one the right To challenge
was Authorities were quoted III support OF ts
The evidence III regard to the fugitive Aldvrncn was
presented because they were important witnesses Tor the
people, anu necessary 10 show why
uey were not called by proving that they were in Can
lda The flight of accomphce was also admissible
against "a defendant McQuaie had admitted 10 these
men that received his share or the money LII re-
gard the introduction OF two strangers INTO court the
District who was lighting money, political III
uence learning and eUquence, III behalf OF the people
suddenly learned tuat of the jury Was fOrswo H. lie
brought tue with the information INTO court ana gave
them 10 the and the counsel Tor the defence IT,
WAS found that there nothing i'll the matter and no
influence drought 10 bear upon the jurors because
they know nothing OF what going on at the time. III
was right court 10 charge that the jury was
bound disregard incompetent testimony As TINS was
law The Recorder had charged that despite the
fact that ugralt and Duly had once sworn falsely
now they they spoke truly the jury could believe
them II their evidence oorrODOratcd.
General Tracy briefly replied 10 MI. Nicoll and with
request that briefs be promptly submitted Judge Pratt
reserved lie said he could not decide within
twelve houre would do promptly as possible.
rested charge of libel by juror Rosenbeig vas
renee Kelly and saian slnmcrhays: Mr.. Nckernan
has Ludlow street JAN since Ills arrest NesD
his partner, released several days ago